Search results

There has been limited evidence on which to base services in the community for people who have intellectual disabilities and coexisting mental health problems. Recent research involving service users, carers and professionals has identified a number of key service components that community services should provide. More detail is needed to explore how best these components could be implemented and delivered. This paper aims to discuss these issues.

A total of 14 multidisciplinary professionals from specialist intellectual disabilities services in the UK were interviewed about their opinions on four key areas of community service provision. These included the review and monitoring of service users, their access to social, leisure and occupational activities, the support, advice and training around mental health for a person's family or carers and “out of hours” and crisis responses. The interview data was used for coding using the NVivo 7 software package and then analyzed using thematic analysis.

Analysis of participants' views on these key essential service components produced wider themes of importance. The ten major emergent themes for services were: their configuration/structure, their clarity of purpose/care pathways, their joint working, their training, their flexibility, their resources, their evidence‐base, being holistic/multidisciplinary, being needs‐led/personalised and providing accessible information.

These views of experts can help inform further research for the development and the evaluation of services.

The use of accessible, portable, mental health crisis information in people with intellectual disabilities has not been previously reported. The purpose of this paper is to explore whether crisis information could be modified to be made accessible and meaningful for people with intellectual disabilities.

Personalized information to help in a mental health crisis was recorded on folded A4 sized sheets that could be carried in a conveniently sized wallet.

Three quarters of the participants carried their crisis information wallets on a daily basis for six months before evaluation. They and their carers expressed positive feedback about them carrying the crisis information. No one carrying the information actually experienced a mental health crisis in the six months follow up period so their usefulness in such crises could not be evaluated. However, they were unexpectedly used in other non‐mental health settings and reported to have been helpful.

The sample size in this was small but the findings suggested that the carrying of crisis information might be a helpful measure for some people with intellectual disabilities. A further, larger scale trial is warranted.

Three separate focus groups were conducted to compare the views of service users, carers and specialist health professionals on community services for adults with psychosis and learning disabilities. Participants were asked which staff, treatments or interventions and methods of working or style of service organisation make a significant contribution to helping people with psychosis and learning disabilities. Although there were few direct contradictions or conflicts between the three groups, the priorities of service users, carers and professionals often differed. Development of community services for adults with psychosis and learning disabilities should incorporate the views of service users and their carers as well as clinicians.

This case study seeks to explore the differences between carer and professional perspectives in the assessment and treatment of a young man with intellectual disabilities, autism and mental health problems.

The opinions and perspectives of psychiatrists involved in the care and treatment of “S” and “S”'s mother about the aetiology, course, treatment and prognosis of “S”'s condition, are explored using “explanatory models”.

This paper shows the similarities and the differences of opinions and perspectives about the mental health care of a person with intellectual disabilities.

It shows how the explicit comparison of notions about a person's condition, assessment and treatment may help all involved to work together for the common ground of achieving the best outcomes for service users.

This case study is of a man with learning disabilities and significant general medical and mental health problems. It illustrates some of the difficulties in assessment, diagnosis, management and service provision with such cases. It is described how an extended admission to a specialist in‐patient unit was necessary in which the Care Programme Approach (CPA) was used to organise multidisciplinary care.

People with schizophrenia and related psychoses may be more likely to be ‘treatment‐resistant’ when dually diagnosed with intellectual disabilities. This case study highlights many of the difficulties which can occur in their assessment and management. Clozapine is currently the best available intervention for treatment‐resistant schizophrenia, and its use has increased in people with intellectual disabilities. However, it is not always effective, and a wide range of adjunctive strategies have been suggestive and tried. The evidence base for the specific use of these additional strategies in people with intellectual disabilities needs to be increased.

We describe how Supervised Discharge (Section 25) of the Mental Health Act 1983 was used to promote mental health care in the community for a man with mild learning disabilities and paranoid schizophrenia who has had repeated relapses and hospital admissions. The new compulsory Community Treatment Order in England and Wales introduced by the Mental Health Act 2007 is explored in comparison with Section 25 Supervised Discharge, which it has now replaced, and compared with similar legislation already introduced in Scotland. The practice implications of the new supervised community treatment orders are discussed.

There is ongoing discussion around how to structure psychiatric services to meet the needs of people with intellectual disability and co‐morbid mental illness and several different models have been suggested. With research evidence lacking, there is a lack of consensus as to the best model of service provision. This paper aims to review the current knowledge in this area and discuss the salient issues.

This is a review article summarising the current debate. Evidence from original research is presented and combined with opinion from clinical experience.

The authors find a lack of robust research evidence to support any particular model of service provision. However, it seems to be increasingly accepted that purely generic models of care for people with intellectual disabilities and co‐morbid mental illness are not appropriate. Integration of the expertise from specialist services within mainstream services is presented as potentially the most advantageous approach.

This article will be of benefit to clinicians working in the field of intellectual disability and mental illness, and to managers and commissioners with responsibility for providing services. It will also be useful for those new to the discipline to gain an overview of the current issues and debate within service planning for this population.

This paper describes an ongoing process of engagement with carers of people with intellectual disabilities currently being monitored by an out of area service for both carers of people placed both in area and out of area within a local Mental Health Learning Disabilities team in South London.

Using a series of consultation events, carers were asked to participate in a free dialogue which focussed on everyday issues for carers. This included financial implications of caring, knowledge of care pathways/systems in care, carer's needs and expectations and the support they currently receive.

This paper highlighted a number of issues and concerns that carers face in their daily lives when supporting one or more people. These include lack of recognition, financial difficulties, lack of training and support.

This project offered a valuable insight into current carer perceptions and will help develop further discussion and promote greater engagement by services and mutual understanding with this often neglected group.